That said, I don't mind how that rule is written. I'm worried on how it's going to be enforced, I don't have a whole lot of faith on the officials.

This is what scares me the most. Even more so, the last part stating, "shall be reviewed for possible supplemental discipline." We've all seen preferential treatment of players based on the name on the back of the jersey and I'd like to see this rule be more cut and dry all the way to the finish.

Removing the instigator would have also worked, without having to rely on our brilliant officials.

So the guy with brain damage has the satisfaction of knowing the other guy will get his ass kicked? Assuming the players will self police this kind of hit away seems less effective than literally policing it away...

So the guy with brain damage has the satisfaction of knowing the other guy will get his ass kicked? Assuming the players will self police this kind of hit away seems less effective than literally policing it away...

So the guy with brain damage has the satisfaction of knowing the other guy will get his ass kicked? Assuming the players will self police this kind of hit away seems less effective than literally policing it away...

Please list some of the players who were brain damaged as a result of blindside head-hits durring the era before the instigator rule was thought up.

It isn't about relatiation, it's about respecta and prevention, and for the most part it worked.

"It was pretty interesting," said Detroit coach Mike Babcock. "We had May in exhibition for a couple of games and no one gets hacked or whacked. When we don't have him, we get run. We don't have a team that twists off helmets at stoppages. You get tired of seeing it all the time. It's just nice when you get someone to look after that stuff."

Work to do what, restore the respect that players had for eachother in an era when few wore helmets and anyone could fight anyone at any time without provocation without worry of penalties in excess of a fighting major? I doubt it will do that.

Work to reduce injuries in the NHL? Doubtful. There aren't that many injuries caused by blindside hits to the head to begin with.

I suspect it will work to the extent that rules against hitting from behind work now - so, somewhat.

It will likely work to increase suspensions for players who are borderline NHLers, create much webforum crying about star players who don't get suspended, and it will resulty in more powreplays than there are now.

I like the rule but I think it could be improved upon.

No more instigator, no more hard pads. That's a good start if people want to make a safer, more exciting game.

If I was seriously injured I don't think it would make me feel any better even if someone did beat the hell out of the player that hit me.

If players are alowed to fight for retaliation without having to fear that they'll take their team out of the game, I expect cheapshots to happen less often - preventing injuries, or at least preventing the types of plays we're talking about here that sometimes (though not alarmingly often) cause serious injury. Some players will still player dirty, as some players always did - but others will think twice.

"It was pretty interesting," said Detroit coach Mike Babcock. "We had May in exhibition for a couple of games and no one gets hacked or whacked. When we don't have him, we get run. We don't have a team that twists off helmets at stoppages. You get tired of seeing it all the time. It's just nice when you get someone to look after that stuff."

I'm not aware of blindside hits to the head involving Fleming. I know about the buttend and the stick swinging though. Please elaborate.

I do not advocate players playing the game without helmets - I suspect bare heads hitting the ice or being hit by pucks or fists were the primary cause of most long term brain dammage to hockey players, not checks to the head. Again though, I am in favor of a rule calling out headhunting for what it is, unsportsmanlike and dirty.

Edited by micah, 10 March 2010 - 04:34 PM.

"It was pretty interesting," said Detroit coach Mike Babcock. "We had May in exhibition for a couple of games and no one gets hacked or whacked. When we don't have him, we get run. We don't have a team that twists off helmets at stoppages. You get tired of seeing it all the time. It's just nice when you get someone to look after that stuff."

I'm not aware of blindside hits to the head involving Fleming. I know about the buttend and the stick swinging though. Please elaborate.

I do not advocate players playing the game without helmets - I suspect bare heads hitting the ice or being hit by pucks or fists were the primary cause of most long term brain dammage to hockey players, not checks to the head. Again though, I am in favor of a rule calling out headhunting for what it is, unsportsmanlike and dirty.

I don't. A guy like Boogaard for example can just cheap shot who ever he wants, because he usually don't have to be "afraid" figthing. And I don't think that's an excuse.

Cheap shots should always be punished with suspensions. This is ice-hockey, not last man standing wrestling or something like that. The refs and the league is there to take care of the punishments. No team should be having to do that themselves. No team should be having to whitstand cheap shots just because they don't have a guy who takes care that "justice" happens.